Mr M Tkachenko v Written submissions Northern Recruitment (Scotland) Ltd — 2026

This judgment was not a determination of the merits of Mr M Tkachenko’s claim. The tribunal dealt with the respondent’s application for reconsideration of the default judgment entered on 10 October 2025 after the ET1 had been served at the respondent’s registered office but was returned unopened. The claimant did not provide an alternative address when asked, and the respondent later said it had not received the ET1 and had therefore had no opportunity to respond.

The respondent’s position was that the claimant had been a self-employed CIS worker via IConsult payroll and had not been an employee of Northern Recruitment (Scotland) Ltd. The tribunal accepted that the respondent had not seen the ET1, noted that the respondent had a stateable defence with a reasonable prospect of succeeding depending on the facts, and concluded that the balance of prejudice favoured allowing the respondent to present that defence.

The default judgment was therefore revoked in the interests of justice under rule 69. The tribunal ordered that the ET1 be re-served at the respondent’s registered office and copied to Ms Donnelly by email, and granted an extension of time for the ET3 until 4 March 2026. The judgment expressly records that the issue of the claimant’s employment status had not been considered or determined because no defence had been presented before the default judgment was entered.